or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Danley SH-50/SH-60 for dedicated Home Theater
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Danley SH-50/SH-60 for dedicated Home Theater - Page 9

post #241 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLion View Post

Thanks. They came with grill covers and a cloth.

I have dual SVS PB-13 Ultras piano gloss. Waiting for Mark Seaton to release his 18" SubMersive XLs...

It will be quite interesting to see what happens if you match the SH-50 with an accepted reference class amp like the JC-1 and one of the best DACs money can buy. I guess this hasn't been done all to often yet.

I was using a pair of SH50 with a pair of Parasound JC1s and a JC2 pre and I have a friend who is using a pair of SH100B with JC1/JC2 as well. I think, if you would like t ouse the very, very best, you should have to try the MSB Technology M202 monoblocks, I had them for 2 days exactly a year ago, and it was something extremely special, if money is really not an object, you can not imagine how well it sounds until one did not hear it, even after the JC1s. For stereo (or 2.1) listening if money is no object, but you want a simple one box source/amp solution, you can try the French Devialet /DAC/ADC/DSP/amp too, this is what I am using with the SM60 at the moment. In a week or two there will be a new software for it, which makes the internal DSP available as a digital crossover, this way you can cascade two units, one for the fronts and one for the subs, using the xover and cascade mode capability of the units.

If you do not want to buy another Devialet, than you can programme one of the analog inputs and as a line level output, crossed the speaker output at 80 Hz/24 dB and this line level output at 80 Hz624 Hz (example only, not a hint), and then you need and active sub or an amp / sub package only to use the internal xover capability of the unit. Very clever and flexible and an extremely good sound.
post #242 of 705
Hey Kutlow,

I much as I want to see you get the TH221 I'm almost certain that your bass problems are room related. Your room looks average size and three DTS10's should be really rocking. Before you pull the trigger on a TH221, try running a single DTS but have it positioned so that the mouth is half way up and fires into a corner about 6-8 inches away, cross it at 90 Hz. In my room that made a huge difference when it comes to mid-bass, the DTS came alive in the 45 Hz and above area and the impact and pressure in the chest feeling is phenomenal. Try searching for a post by Robobob in the DTS thread, I believe he found greater mid bass impact with that positioning as well, plus he posted pictures.
post #243 of 705
Hey Mark, I'm sorry if this sounds a bit mean but I can't help it. I'm kind of hating you right now.
post #244 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by parapet View Post

Hey Kutlow,

I much as I want to see you get the TH221 I'm almost certain that your bass problems are room related. Your room looks average size and three DTS10's should be really rocking. Before you pull the trigger on a TH221, try running a single DTS but have it positioned so that the mouth is half way up and fires into a corner about 6-8 inches away, cross it at 90 Hz. In my room that made a huge difference when it comes to mid-bass, the DTS came alive in the 45 Hz and above area and the impact and pressure in the chest feeling is phenomenal. Try searching for a post by Robobob in the DTS thread, I believe he found greater mid bass impact with that positioning as well, plus he posted pictures.

Can you see if you can find that post? I looked and cant find it. Thanks in advance.
post #245 of 705
I'll have a look for it. I remember that post by robobob. It was well into the thread. I would imagine over 2000 posts in.

Kutlow, I'm working on a placement option for your dts-10's and may need to call you tonight to see how your room/screen is layed out. IF IF IF this idea I have works you could potentially get a good boost in output over what you have now.
post #246 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandonnash View Post

I'll have a look for it. I remember that post by robobob. It was well into the thread. I would imagine over 2000 posts in.

Kutlow, I'm working on a placement option for your dts-10's and may need to call you tonight to see how your room/screen is layed out. IF IF IF this idea I have works you could potentially get a good boost in output over what you have now.

ok. After I get everything hooked up you should come down and have a listen!
post #247 of 705
Pm me your number again. I thought I still had it from an older pm but I can't find it.
post #248 of 705
Nevermind. I found it. Will call you tonight.
post #249 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFGuy View Post

Kutlow is that screen of yours AT ? Plan to put the Danleys behind it ?

His screen isn't accoustically transparent.

Just up for discussion....are there problems with high gain screens (for 3D) that are accoustically transparent?
post #250 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post

Can you see if you can find that post? I looked and cant find it. Thanks in advance.

Hi Mark:

Wall facing configuration - Higher resolution measurements


Hope this helps!
post #251 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by robobob View Post

Hi Mark:

Wall facing configuration - Higher resolution measurements


Hope this helps!

Thank you very much.
post #252 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by robobob View Post

Hi Mark:

Wall facing configuration - Higher resolution measurements


Hope this helps!

did you try it with the mouth at the bottom verses the top? If so I guess on top sounded better to you? Did it sound better than having them up against the front wall with the mouths at the bottom firing towards the listening position?
Like this.
post #253 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post

did you try it with the mouth at the bottom verses the top? If so I guess on top sounded better to you? Did it sound better than having them up against the front wall with the mouths at the bottom firing towards the listening position?
Like this.

Mouth at bottom was tried but the results were better with mouth at top (or effectively midwall position).

In N84china's room, placement parallel with the screen wall, as you are suggesting, was not a viable placement option, so no, it was not tried in that room.

In general, the specific room geometry will dominate any anecdotal reports about the best placement options from other rooms.

However, I can say that, from my experimentation in N84china's room, the extra path length or virtual horn mouth size that results from placing the horn mouth against the wall (in the vertical middle of the wall but at the junction of two walls, screen and right side) consistently smoothed the response AND provided more SPL than mouth facing listener and mouth at floor level.

Get a friend to help maneuver the DTS-10's and start with one, trying to find the location and orientation which results in the best combination of SPL and response that still fits into your HT layout. Once you get one DTS-10 singing strongly and smoothly in your room, then comes the challenge of placing the other two without disturbing the first and without creating nulls in combination.
post #254 of 705
rob,

Did the frequency response shift when repositioning? I would expect it to.
post #255 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimP View Post
rob,

Did the frequency response shift when repositioning? I would expect it to.
Yes, the frequency response got smoother and extended lower in the final position shown.
post #256 of 705
Bump

Two members have received SH50s in as many weeks and you can hear crickets chirping in this thread. Come on gents, knock the dust off those remotes.
post #257 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04FLHRCI View Post

Bump

Two members have received SH50s in as many weeks and you can hear crickets chirping in this thread. Come on gents, knock the dust off those remotes.

Thats funny. I havent even unpacked one of my SH50 yet. I had to build two stands for them today. Then tomorrow I will build the center SH69 stand. I redone my who theater so its taking awhile. I moved all my equipment to a closet so i wont hear the fans. Im waiting on 5 Crest pro audio amps to ship. So its going to be awhile since I was told by Crest there is a parts issue they just discovered on the last batch. Trust me Im wanting to hear these things very bad!
post #258 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by robobob View Post

Yes, the frequency response got smoother and extended lower in the final position shown.

Rob I dont have enough room beside my screen to position them like that. Mine are 4 inches from the front wall firing at the listening position. Do you think I should try and face them so they fire into the front wall? Here is a pic of mine behind the screen.
post #259 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandonnash View Post

Nevermind. I found it. Will call you tonight.

your fan mod is in the mail.
post #260 of 705
kutlow, you will enjoy the equipment being out of the room! It's one of my favorite "upgrades".

I experimented in every conceivable position with my pair. I settled on firing into the front wall. I've got about 10" of space between. It seemed to smooth things out a bit to the ear, and increased the SPL by about 3db in my room.
post #261 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony123 View Post

kutlow, you will enjoy the equipment being out of the room! It's one of my favorite "upgrades".

I experimented in every conceivable position with my pair. I settled on firing into the front wall. I've got about 10" of space between. It seemed to smooth things out a bit to the ear, and increased the SPL by about 3db in my room.

thank you very much. Ill get JIMP up here to lug these around.
post #262 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony123 View Post

I experimented in every conceivable position with my pair. I settled on firing into the front wall. I've got about 10" of space between. It seemed to smooth things out a bit to the ear, and increased the SPL by about 3db in my room.

Did you try the opening low/high, corner/out as well? Some prefered firing into the wall with the hole high, furthest from the corner, but iirc you had placed them differently.
post #263 of 705
I tried them with ports low and high in the rear of my room. Since they've been in the front, I haven't tried "high". I had a chart that I recorded FR graphs (done the manual way) for around 20 different configuration options. Now that I've got EQ, I realize I was about wasting my time with those experiments. Well...I needed the excersize. Currently, there is very little I would want to improve upon. And, since they're located in my designed location, I have no motivation to experiment any further. FINALLY.
post #264 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post

thank you very much. Ill get JIMP up here to lug these around.

I saw that.
post #265 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post

Rob I dont have enough room beside my screen to position them like that. Mine are 4 inches from the front wall firing at the listening position. Do you think I should try and face them so they fire into the front wall? Here is a pic of mine behind the screen.

Mark:

If you have an extra 4-5" space behind the screen, to allow the mouth some "breathing room", then yes, I would try them with the mouths facing the screen wall instead directly at the audience.

Given that you have the DTS-10's standing on their 44" side, you have two wall-facing variations to try: one with mouth low as shown in your photo (only facing the other way) and one with the mouth high.

Can't say which will work better for your room but mouth high worked best for N84china's room.

Also, given that you have a "bank" of three, placing the mouths at the top, where the sound wave can bounce directly off the back wall into the room, versus having to pass through effectively a 3-cabinet-wide 5" "slot" before reaching free air, may be best for your setup as well.

Do you have any test gear yet? Otherwise, select a known LFE demo source, sit down and just listen. Hopefully, your placement experiments will get you closer to your goal. Some form of human-interfacing EQ (in contrast to the automatic EQ algorithms built-in to receivers/surround processors) will be needed though, to get good results from the DTS-10.

Basically, squash down the DTS-10's rising response above 40Hz in order to make the 15-40Hz range proportionately louder than the non-EQed response, flattening its upper band to make its lower band more relatively powerful.

With a single DTS-10, the EQ process made a night and day difference in the chest-pounding capabilities of the sub.
post #266 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony123 View Post

I tried them with ports low and high in the rear of my room. Since they've been in the front, I haven't tried "high". I had a chart that I recorded FR graphs (done the manual way) for around 20 different configuration options. Now that I've got EQ, I realize I was about wasting my time with those experiments. Well...I needed the excersize. Currently, there is very little I would want to improve upon. And, since they're located in my designed location, I have no motivation to experiment any further. FINALLY.

I had a feeling you didn't try the high port at that location ever since your final placement pictures. Had to ask.

Just ordered 2 SM60F's through Scott. He will be on a trip the coming days, hopefully this doesn't delay things too much.
post #267 of 705
Now you've got me thinking.... I suppose I'll try it next time I have things torn apart.
post #268 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ettepet View Post

Just ordered 2 SM60F's through Scott. He will be on a trip the coming days, hopefully this doesn't delay things too much.


Congratulations and welcome to this growing Danley family of "extreme listeners"! I counted at least half a dozen guys in this thread who are getting ready to join this group of "enlightened pure sound lovers".

I believe by now readers of this thread should have come to the conclusion that the Danleys are very special speakers which are vastly different than most of the audiophile speakers out there. Most of these emphasize the ability to "throw" a large soundstage beyond the cabinet boundaries; audiophiles further "enhance" this spaciousness with various sound diffusing products. The end result are larger than life sound reproduction from all sources and many find this pleasing. With the Danleys, because of their unique design, they are on the direct opposite in terms of interacting with the existing room acoustics. In stead of depending on the room to "create" this sense of false spaciousness by bouncing the sound around, the Danleys affect the room acoustics (which usually are much less than ideal unless one has a purpose-built sound room) so much less. As a result they are much more faithful in "re-creating" what's originally on the recording as intended by the recording engineer and producer. I personally find this type of reproduction more satisfying.

I really don't see any risk in getting these "PA" speakers without auditioning. What you will get is a true sonic marvel designed and perfected by someone who IS an audiophile who grew up in the era of theater horn speakers (Voice of the Theater), so knows what effortlessly powerful sound is. On the other hand he had once owned/designed large electrostatics so he also knows what transparency, imaging and soundstaging are. Now combining the quality of these apparently different sonic virtues and you get the breakthrough synergy horn design. What more can one asks for?!

After half a year, every time when I listen to my Danleys I'm still blown away by the experience. Today I just did another marathon listening session, totally immersed in the kind of sonic experience that I wish every music lover can have. I played one of my favorite piece of symphonic music, Scheherazade, conducted by Maestro Stokowski/London Symphony Orchestra, on Cala reissue. The famous 1964 London "Phase 4 Stereo" sound came alive SO brilliantly that I was totally glued to my listening chair without even daring to breathe too deeply (just like sitting in a live symphony concert) for the whole 45 minute!

As soon as the music began, my mind was immediately transported to the famous Kingsway Hall, the soundstage is HUGE and totally dominated my room, the room totally disappeared! All the instruments are seemingly on steroids, the aural perspective is up-front, at-the-podium (as intended by the then state-of-the-art recording technique), soloists stand out like under bright spot light (again due to close mic technique). I have NEVER heard this piece of music came alive like this before! Rimsky-Korsakov's powerful, lyrical melodies washed me over wave after wave with the seductive sound of the violin soloist, the woodwinds answering each other, and the sudden interruptions by the blaring bite of the brass section, the growling sound from the celli and double basses, the explosive clash of the cymbals, the powerful score expends and contracts and for the whole duration of the music, I was in the mind-alert/body-asleep state of sensory bliss! I stayed totally still after the music ended, I wanted to linger in that state of mind a little longer. Then I opened my eyes and said to myself "now THAT is what hi fi is all about!" It is visceral and emotional, it allows the music to speak to your soul, it transports you to the musical event!

Playing another version of Scheherazade in this marathon listening session, now a modern Reference Recording HDCD lead by Jose Serebrier (who as a young man, worked closely with Stokowski) with London Symphony Orchestra, the sound is VERY different from the previously described "Phase 4 Stereo" sound. Now the huge up-front, on-the-podium, under spot-light presentation is replaced with the best-seat-in-the-house perspective. One hears a huge and deep soundstage (much deeper than the Phase 4 recording) with much more "air" of the recording venue. Music is rendered in an incredibly transparent and powerful way, less visceral but no less in its ability to elicit deep emotion. This is as intended by the famed "professor" Keith Johnson who is considered one the very best recording engineers in the world. In each case I believe the Danleys are able to recreate exactly what the recording engineers and producers wanted to capture in the recording.
post #269 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by jheyau View Post

I believe by now readers of this thread should have come to the conclusion that the Danleys are very special speakers which are vastly different than most of the audiophile speakers out there. Most of these emphasize the ability to "throw" a large soundstage beyond the cabinet boundaries; audiophiles further "enhance" this spaciousness with various sound diffusing products. The end result are larger than life sound reproduction from all sources and many find this pleasing. With the Danleys, because of their unique design, they are on the direct opposite in terms of interacting with the existing room acoustics. In stead of depending on the room to "create" this sense of false spaciousness by bouncing the sound around, the Danleys affect the room acoustics (which usually are much less than ideal unless one has a purpose-built sound room) so much less. As a result they are much more faithful in "re-creating" what's originally on the recording as intended by the recording engineer and producer. I personally find this type of reproduction more satisfying.

I really don't see any risk in getting these "PA" speakers without auditioning. What you will get is a true sonic marvel designed and perfected by someone who IS an audiophile who grew up in the era of theater horn speakers (Voice of the Theater), so knows what effortlessly powerful sound is. On the other hand he had once owned/designed large electrostatics so he also knows what transparency, imaging and soundstaging are. Now combining the quality of these apparently different sonic virtues and you get the breakthrough synergy horn design. What more can one asks for?!

After half a year, every time when I listen to my Danleys I'm still blown away by the experience. Today I just did another marathon listening session, totally immersed in the kind of sonic experience that I wish every music lover can have. I played one of my favorite piece of symphonic music, Scheherazade, conducted by Maestro Stokowski/London Symphony Orchestra, on Cala reissue. The famous 1964 London "Phase 4 Stereo" sound came alive SO brilliantly that I was totally glued to my listening chair without even daring to breathe too deeply (just like sitting in a live symphony concert) for the whole 45 minute!

...snip...

Your post is so far over the top and has enough inaccuracies that I have to be skeptical about these speakers. Why fabricate so much unless there is a reason to do so.

I would highly recommend that anyone who is serious about any speaker (applies to all speakers) to be sure that the ones you're considering is auditioned in a room that's reasonably similar to your home theater. Speakers auditioned in a warehouse (Danley's audition venue) will only be valid if your home theater happens to be a warehouse. A question you should be asking yourself is do the Danley's have to be played at the upper end of their volume level to sound good. Often times, drivers that have to be played loud to sound good don't perform well at lower levels. In a typical home theater when compared to a warehouse, you have a lot less space to fill with sound so you're not likely to be driving any speaker as loud.

As for some of the other inaccuracies of the post, the laws of physics do not change just because you're using a particular brand/model/design of speaker. The sense of spaciousness in home theater application is mostly created by surround speakers. Accoustical treatment is aimed at correcting undesirable room interaction. If you're into two channel audio with no interest in home theater, then the room accoustics would optimally be designed differently to provide a controlled environment more suited for two channel audio.

Be careful what you buy especially when there is no return policy.

Class over.

....may the flames begin.
post #270 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimP View Post

Your post is so far over the top and has enough inaccuracies that I have to be skeptical about these speakers. Why fabricate so much unless there is a reason to do so.

I would highly recommend that anyone who is serious about any speaker (applies to all speakers) to be sure that the ones you're considering is auditioned in a room that's reasonably similar to your home theater. Speakers auditioned in a warehouse (Danley's audition venue) will only be valid if your home theater happens to be a warehouse. A question you should be asking yourself is do the Danley's have to be played at the upper end of their volume level to sound good. Often times, drivers that have to be played loud to sound good don't perform well at lower levels. In a typical home theater when compared to a warehouse, you have a lot less space to fill with sound so you're not likely to be driving any speaker as loud.

As for some of the other inaccuracies of the post, the laws of physics do not change just because you're using a particular brand/model/design of speaker. The sense of spaciousness in home theater application is mostly created by surround speakers. Accoustical treatment is aimed at correcting undesirable room interaction. If you're into two channel audio with no interest in home theater, then the room accoustics would optimally be designed differently to provide a controlled environment more suited for two channel audio.

Be careful what you buy especially when there is no return policy.

Class over.

....may the flames begin.

Actually let the class BEGIN.

I would not call the Danley demo room a "Warehouse". It is part of a larger room but the ceiling is only about 12' high.

The listening seats are about the same distance as a normal large HT setup.

We start all the demos at low levels and then work up.

It is not a "blast fest". It is all about the detail in the sound-and yes the sound is still very good very low.

You are wrong about how the loudspeakers interact with the room. The pattern control GREATLY affects how the overall sound is presented into the room.

Loudspeakers without LARGE horns will tend to spray the sound all over the walls, celing etc. So what you hear (unless your walls are heavily absorbtive) is a combination of the direct sound from the loudspeakers, PLUS the additional echos/reflections off of the wall surfaces.

As a result, this is NOT what the producer of the album/movie etc wanted you to hear. He was listening in a room that was free of those "extra free sounds".

When you have a loudspeaker with a large horn (such as the Danley products), there is much less sound hitting the walls/ceiling. So the reflections you get off of those surfaces are greatly reduced in level (as compared to the direct sound), so the sound is more as the producer intended you to hear it. Much clearer.

Having a loudspeaker with a high sensitivity (and power capacity) allows for an easier reproduction of peaks without the loudspeaker working as hard (less distortion).

All to often people get "caught up" in trying to tweak their room, and yet use loudspeakers that are fundamentally flawed in the design. Having a better sound reproducer will result in greater gains.

At least that is how I see it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Danley SH-50/SH-60 for dedicated Home Theater